The Minister of State, Deputy Ossian Smyth, is here to deal with Topical Issues. He is very welcome. Our first Topical Issue comes from Deputy Thomas Pringle, who wishes to discuss a foetal alcohol project to be undertaken with a multicare sector approach.

I thank the Ceann Comhairle. Is the Minister of State, Deputy Smyth, taking this Topical Issue as well? Is he taking them all?

Is the Minister of State taking them all?

I am taking two.

The Minister, Deputy Peter Burke, is coming in as well.

No offence to the Minister of State, Deputy Smyth, but I understood that Topical Issues were supposed to be taken by the relevant Minister. As far as I understand it, he is a Minister of State at the Department of public expenditure, and this is the responsibility of the Department of Rural and Community Development. It is disappointing but I know that is the way Topical Issues have developed over the last-----

Let us be clear. I want to be helpful to the Deputy. What should be happening is where a Topical Issue is selected and the Department is notified, the Department should be notifying the Deputy as to whether the Minister to deal with it is the Minister from the relevant Department.

It did not do that.

It is not happening a lot of the time.

It has never happened.

When you raise the issue under a Standing Order - I am not sure of the exact Standing Order but the Ceann Comhairle will know which one - the Deputy then has an option that a lot of Deputies do not seem to be aware of.

To defer, or-----

They can either take it, or have it deferred one day and have it taken by a Minister from that Department. Of course, that does not work if you are not told beforehand.

I will have to call on the Government Chief Whip to examine the matter because procedurally, we are not acting properly, nor ignoring-----

Is Deputy Ó Cuív happy for me to answer his question?

I think Deputy Pringle is.

I have prepared for this to be taken today. Had I been aware, I would have deferred, as I wanted the Minister to be here. Basically, we are talking to the ether anyway.

I came in here to chair this and I am not aware of what the situation is until somebody tells me. The Deputy is telling me now, and I am telling him what the procedure is. Deputy Ó Cuív has pointed it out.

How are we supposed to know when there was no communication? I assumed the Minister was going to be here to take the Topical Issue. We cannot be charged with going around-----

I do not expect the Deputy to be divinely inspired.

Not yet.

Not yet, no. I will wait until I go over that side, and then we will do it.

As the Minister of State knows, FASD - and he might not know of it but I will talk to it anyway - is foetal alcohol spectrum disorder. It is an underrecognised condition in Ireland. Compared to other jurisdictions like Canada and New Zealand, we are way behind in dealing with it and providing funding and support for sufferers and their families. There are estimates that between 4.75% and 7.2% of the population in Ireland is living with FASD. The problem is, bizarrely, that we do not know for sure because there have been no studies or research carried out here. That is the crux of the issue of why we are here.

While there are no statistics in Ireland, the agencies are working with FASD and recognising FASD as a problem that needs to be addressed. I know from talking to FASD Ireland that in some areas, staff trying to deal with very difficult children are asking them to help but the State organisations themselves are not recognising FASD. This is leading to children being left behind; children who could have more productive lives if the State was able to assist them properly. Schoolgoing children may have learning difficulties because they can find it difficult to plan, organise themselves or understand the consequences of their actions. They will have challenges such as inattention, hyperactivity, anxiety and frustration.

An individual with FASD who does not have the correct support in place can experience many challenges throughout his or her life as well. These generally develop during adolescence but can develop earlier. Such people can experience difficulties with peers, inappropriate sexual behaviour, involvement in crime, poor mental health, alcohol and drug misuse and challenges with independent living. Individuals with FASD are 19 times more likely to encounter the judicial system than a neurotypical person. That is according to a doctor and researcher at the University of Salford in the UK, Dr. David Gilbert.

I have seen some estimates that up to 30% of individuals who are in prison are sufferers of FASD. In Ireland, it is considered that this could be an even higher percentage but the reality is we do not know because we have not researched it. Recognising the condition and treating it could save the State huge amounts of funding for vital and scarce public services, so even from a bean counter's point of view it would make sense. Likewise, we do not know the prevalence throughout all our systems of health and education because we have not recognised the existence of FASD.

FASD sufferers have comorbidities that are more recognised, and the treatments for those comorbidities can be counterproductive for FASD sufferers. A treatment that works for ADHD, for example, could have an opposite effect on an FASD sufferer, and not being recognised, they may fall through the cracks with regard to getting adequate treatment. It could be looked at that they are not responsive but if FASD was treated rather than the comorbidity, that could have a significant alternate effect and mean a better quality of life for the patient.

I know that there has been an allocation to FASD Ireland in the Department of Health budget for this year but that has not made its way to FASD Ireland yet and we are almost two thirds of the way through the year at this stage. That is worrying because in order to plan for next year, studies have to be started and that needs to happen quickly. As the Minister of State knows, it is about providing the evidence base so we could have a funding allocation that would allow support to be put in place. Rightly, Government money cannot be spent on something that perhaps cannot be proven to work. I believe that it will be proved necessary and if the sufferers and their families are supported, the future will look better for everybody.

I thank Deputy Pringle for raising this issue. My colleague, the Minister of State with responsibility for disabilities, Deputy Anne Rabbitte, remains committed to the continued development and enhancement of our disability services through the implementation of both the HSE’s progressing disability services, PDS, roadmap for service improvement from 2023 to 2026 and the Department’s action plan for disability services from 2024 to 2026.

As the Deputy will be aware, foetal alcohol spectrum disorder is a prevalent yet preventable neurodevelopmental condition. It is a group of disorders caused by prenatal alcohol exposure and it is associated with a range of lifelong physical, mental, educational, social, and behavioural difficulties. FASD is caused by the consumption of alcohol at any time from six weeks before conception, by either parent, until the baby is born. Many people do not know or recognise that they are living with FASD.

The most recent available figures from the HSE estimate the prevalence of FASD in Ireland is between 2.8% and 7.4% of the population. An estimated 600 babies are born each year with foetal alcohol syndrome, with a further nine to ten times this number of babies born annually with other foetal alcohol spectrum disorders, FASDs. Only a small proportion of children with FASD have visible facial dysmorphia. The majority of children with FASD have no visible signs of disability at birth, and difficulties may not manifest until preschool or school age. Currently, there are no standard diagnostic policies or guidelines for diagnosing or treating children with FASD in Ireland.

FASD Ireland was established in September 2021 with three core aims: to raise awareness of FASD, to reduce the prevalence of FASD, and to support people living with FASD. The Minister of State, Deputy Rabbitte, was pleased to endorse the launch of the FASD Hub Ireland in March 2023. This important support service provides a national telephone helpline operating Monday to Friday evening between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. for anyone who lives with FASD, anyone who cares for someone living with FASD, and anyone who works with someone living with the condition

The HSE has recommended that a number of actions are implemented to prevent FASD. Many of these actions are currently being progressed, and some new actions are proposed that will require resourcing, such as the development of a national strategy on FASD prevention and response. The Minister of State was pleased to secure ring-fenced funding of €3 million in budget 2024 for targeted services for children, which will allow a number of projects to be progressed in line with the HSE approval process. The HSE has confirmed that €200,000 is being made available to the HSE’s regional executive officer, REO, in the mid-west, in order for FASD Ireland to support an action in the HSE 2024 service plan to deliver a foetal alcohol project using a multicare health sector approach, that is, primary care, mental health services and so on.

The Minister of State, Deputy Rabbitte, has met FASD Ireland and can confirm that the regional executive officer will make arrangements for a grant agreement with the organisation. I wish to assure the House that the Minister of State and officials in her Department are committed to working with colleagues in the Department of Health, alongside other stakeholders, to ensure that the issue of foetal alcohol spectrum disorder is considered a priority and to see that services are delivered in an appropriate manner.

I thank the Minister of State. The Minister of State, Deputy Rabbitte, has outlined in her response that funding has been allocated, that the FASD Hub Ireland was established in March 2023, and it operates from Monday to Friday between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. for anyone who lives with FASD. That is welcome but there is no funding provided for that.

The funding has not actually reached FASD Ireland yet to pay for that. It is operating the service but it is doing so with a loan from the bank because it is waiting for funding to come forward from the Government. It will be July or August at the earliest before funding makes its way to it. That is slack. It will not lead to putting the treatment on a good footing. Part of that funding has to provide for studies to be carried out but they will not be carried out in time for next year's application, so that time will be lost too. During this time, children will be lost. Children and families are living with this condition and cannot deal with it. They will lose out. We need to get moving on it quickly. I would like Deputy Smyth to pass that on to the Minister of State, Deputy Rabbitte, so she is aware of it and makes sure that funding gets there in a timely fashion.

I will pass the Deputy's comments on to the Minister of State. She in turn will continue with the Department and the HSE to advance progress on the provision of services for those living with foetal alcohol spectrum disorder and their families. To this end, I am happy to report that a cross-departmental working group will be established to develop a long-term and sustainable plan that will provide access to appropriate services for those living with FASD and their families. The Minister of State wishes to reiterate her full commitment and that of her Department and the HSE to ensuring that the issue of FASD receives the attention that it deserves and that we endeavour as a Government to provide the level of services required by those living with FASD.

The second item I have selected comes from Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív, who wishes to discuss the need to provide a full range of services based on children's needs to children's disability network team 4, CDNT 4.

The first comment I have to make is that I found out there is more than one CDNT 4 in the country. It is a funny way of naming things. The one I am talking about is in Connemara and covers all of Connemara. It is based in Spiddal and Connemara is as big as most counties on its own. It is a huge geographic area, particularly when you have to drive around the inlets, bays, mountains and hills.

We all know that early intervention is really beneficial for young people and children. The earlier the intervention and the more thorough it is, the better. Giving excuses about why it is not happening is not any good for those children for the rest of their lives. We are talking about affecting people's future permanently. In the long term, it is also imposing a significant cost on the State, with more intervention being needed. As they say, a stitch in time saves nine.

I am not going to mention who is involved in the case. It is the case of a young person. I raised the issues of physiotherapy, occupational therapy and speech therapy. I understand there is a physiotherapy appointment about every three to four months. I love the terminology in what I am told, which is that the child is wait-listed for individualised team intervention from speech and language therapy and occupational therapy, but unfortunately, CDNT 4 is not in a position to identify timeframes for children to be taken off the waiting lists. This child went on the waiting list in October 2021. It goes on to say that CDNT 4 continues to have recruitment challenges and is making efforts to recruit. That does not wash with me because as I was sharply told one time when I started giving excuses, excuses do not get the job done.

I am highlighting it today because we have often seen in the State that when a thing becomes urgent and it is seen that people are not going to lie down and just accept this second-class service, suddenly, miraculously, ways are found of getting, procuring and providing the service. I have, on behalf of many people, chased down the lack of services in CDNT 4, otherwise known as the Connemara children's disability network team, for a long time. What I need to know today is quite simple. The problems that the CDNT has are HSE problems. That is not my business. My only concern is when these children will get a service. When will they get the service when they need it? When will we adhere to the principle of early intervention and a stitch in time saving nine?

My colleague, Deputy Rabbitte, the Minister of State with responsibility for disabilities, is fully committed to the continued development and enhancement of our children's disability services through the CDNTs, as they seek to ensure equitable access to services for all children with complex needs. I acknowledge the difficulties faced by children and their families seeking to access the services of children's disability network teams in community healthcare organisaction 2, and in this particular instance, CDNT 4. The Minister of State wishes to reiterate her unhappiness at this situation and her commitment to addressing the underlying issues.

The children's disability services in community healthcare west, CHW, were reconfigured into children's disability network teams in January 2021. There are nine CDNTs in CHW, including CDNT 4, which broadly covers the west Galway-Connemara area. Recruitment of staff to reduce waiting lists has been an ongoing issue, especially in this region. There are significant challenges both nationally and globally regarding the recruitment and retention of health and social care professionals, particularly to children's disability services. Following an intensive national recruitment campaign, we have recruited nearly 30 staff in the CHW region to date in 2024. While CDNT 4 has only been able to fill one post from this campaign, further campaigns are being run in an effort to attract suitable candidates to this area. While funding has been allocated, vacancy rates in CDNTs unfortunately remain high. On CDNT 4, the HSE advises that the vacancy rate currently stands at 50%, with six staff in place and six posts vacant.

CHW is fully committed to providing a quality service to the CDNT 4 cohort of clients, and every effort will be made to increase staffing numbers to support this during the remainder of 2024. These efforts are ongoing, both through the HSE's national recruitment service and HSE HR at a local level. Additional measures are also being progressed under the progressing disability services roadmap to increase capacity on CDNTs. These include student sponsorship programmes for health and social care professionals, HSCPs. There is a target of 175 therapy assistants to support HSCPs in delivering most effective and efficient services in environments appropriate to each child's needs. There is dedicated work on marketing CDNTs as a workplace of choice.

While recruitment measures are ongoing, I can advise that the HSE is driving forward several initiatives to reduce waiting times and strengthen services for children waiting. These efforts include sourcing assessments from private service providers. A new waiting list initiative with a total fund of €6.9 million will target those families waiting longest for assessments of need, with the HSE reimbursing clinicians directly through the procurement of capacity from approved private providers. This initiative will be progressed through the existing framework of providers procured by the HSE and is expected to provide an additional 2,500 assessments over a six-month period. While recruitment and retention of staff to CDNTs remains a considerable challenge, the Minister of State, Deputy Rabbitte, wishes to reaffirm her commitment, as well as that of the HSE and Department, to exploring all avenues to improve access to CDNTs for children and their families in CDNT 4 and across the country.

The one answer I did not get is the only answer I want. When will this child and all the other children get a service? If what is being done is not tackling it fast enough, what will the services do to tackle it faster? They have not got through the 2021 list yet. There is always a way. Do they need to pay more money? I do not know what they need to do. There is one thing they could do. I know one person from the area with one of the named skills who came home to live here. That person worked for the NHS in London and is fully qualified.

It has taken them a year to register with CORU. Mutual recognition of qualifications between Ireland and Britain and Ireland and the European Union is needed, along with a quick transfer. The accreditation authorities seem to hold these things up forever when it is obvious that if somebody is good enough for the NHS, then, no disrespect, they are good enough for the HSE. We would take severe umbrage if someone in the NHS said somebody good enough for the HSE and qualified here properly, with degrees and all the rest, was not qualified to work in England. I am not satisfied that the recruitment processes in the HSE are adequate nor that this problem is being taken seriously enough. There is a need for crisis management. It seems that when it gets to the point of recruiting and doing interviews, it can take six or nine months to make an appointment. What kind of world are we living in? In the old days, you did an interview, provided the paper versions of your qualifications to guarantee that you had them, provided references, which were checked, and you had a job within three weeks. I do not know what we have done because nothing seems to work or move forward. All we get is excuses and children without a service. I hope the Minister of State carries back to the line Minister my frustration with this issue and my determination to keep advocating for those children who should get early intervention but are not.

I will communicate to the Minister of State, Deputy Rabbitte, Deputy Ó Cuív's frustration at the situation. I will ask for her projection of when the services will be delivered. The Deputy can see from the answer that the problems seem to stem from a lack of staff - half of the positions in CDNT 4 are currently vacant. The HSE has turned to private service providers and has an allocation of nearly €7 million to provide an additional 2,500 assessments over the coming six months. Clearly, it is trying other options. The Deputy suggested that we look into faster mutual recognition of qualifications from jurisdictions such as the UK in order that we can recruit staff more quickly. I will suggest that to the Minister of State.

The HSE launched its first nationwide CDNT campaign in January 2024. Following a further validation and engagement process by the lead agencies, the HSE advises that as of June 2024, 145 job offers have been made to successful candidates, with about 53 in the final stages of the recruitment process. A second recruitment campaign applying learnings from the first will start shortly. I reassure the Deputy of the Minister of State's commitment to working with the HSE to enhance CDNT capacity, find effective solutions to reduce wait times and ensure children and young people with complex needs have timely access to services in CDNT 4 and, of course, across the country. I will communicate to the Minister of State the Deputy's concern.

Will Deputy Smyth ask how many on the shortlist are for CDNT 4? It seems peripheral areas were once again left out.

Does Deputy Ó Cuív want to know how many of the people recruited are for CDNT 4?

Yes.

I will ask that.

The next matter is from Deputies O'Dowd and Nash.

I assume we have two minutes each. I thank the Minister, Deputy Peter Burke, for meeting with Deputy O'Dowd, Senator McGreehan and me earlier. We communicated to him in stark terms how angry we are at Becton Dickinson and Company's decision to close its plant, which has been in Drogheda for 60 years. There are 176 jobs in the firing line and many families are affected. The relationship between Drogheda and Becton Dickinson and Company goes back to the sixties. It is an extraordinary relationship. Hardly anybody in our town, the largest town in Ireland, has not had a relationship of one kind or another with that factory. Drogheda is Ireland's largest town and this is the last remaining IDA Ireland-backed manufacturing facility of scale in our town; let that sink in. We need an enterprise task force to address the reality that Drogheda is an IDA Ireland and foreign direct investment backwater. The Taoiseach said to me yesterday that the DART is coming to Drogheda and that the DART is a two-way street. It is, but where is the IDA Ireland policy to invest in jobs in Drogheda? Government enterprise policy seems to be to move as many people as possible out of Drogheda into Dublin to work, which is not good for our community or society. Will the Minister commit to setting up that enterprise task force? The withdrawal of Becton Dickinson and Company will take place over two years. Will the Minister ask the company to reflect on its decision and periodically review it? I do not want to raise the expectations of workers but it is incumbent on the Minister and IDA Ireland to engage with the company to request that it reviews the decision. I understand that as part of a trade mission, the Minister will meet Becton Dickinson and Company in New York next week. I request on behalf of the workers and SIPTU, which wishes to meet him, that he make that request, without raising expectations unfairly of workers.

I welcome the Minister. Many good things are happening in Drogheda with IDA Ireland. On 26 June, permission was given by Louth County Council for an advanced unit for new industry to come in. IDA Ireland owns 45 acres of land in Drogheda. There is the recent development of two data centres. Many good things are happening, but bad things are happening as well. The bad news for us is that 170 people, 110 early next year, will depart from Becton Dickinson and Company, which is a fantastic company. It is one of the leading international medical companies. That aggrieves me because, as you might guess, my first job 58 years ago was working in the office in Becton Dickinson and Company. I worked there for a year. It was a great company and there were great people there. It promoted local people within the company and internationally. Noel Harmon, who Deputy Nash's father would know, was on the international board of that company. It offered a lot to Drogheda and Drogheda has given it a lot.

My concern about this bad news is that there does not appear to be an early warning system. The Minister was not told about it in time. He could have told us and we could have attempted to persuade or approach people who might be able to help. Nevertheless, the fact is it has made the decision to go. The Minister will be visiting there next week. Perhaps there is a way it can be persuaded, even at this late stage, if there is any further or appropriate intervention we could make. At the heart of that company was a commitment to Drogheda. It was the first place it came to in Ireland. It aggrieves me greatly that it is leaving. We must leave no stone unturned. The pulse, the heartbeat of our State, be it the administrative or political system, must do their best to ensure we make another offer, if one has not been made already. If we cannot, we must work with them to get alternative, appropriate employment there. We need it badly now.

I thank the Deputies for raising this matter, which concerns a huge number of people and their families across County Louth, in particular Drogheda, who are impacted by the decision. I met my Oireachtas colleagues and others in relation to this significant news earlier this week. I met officials from IDA Ireland earlier today to discuss this important issue. I reiterate my position and that of the Government on the floor of the House this afternoon. Becton Dickinson UK and Ireland announced that, following an analysis of its network and forecast market demand, it had made the difficult decision to discontinue production at its site in Drogheda over the next two and a half years. The decision will result in phased closure of the Becton Dickinson Drogheda site by the end of quarter 4 of 2026. This will regrettably directly affect 170 people currently employed there. In response, the Government is on hand to support those workers. Our agencies will work to support the employees affected in the period ahead as they pursue alternative employment. This will include sharing the skills profiles of impacted employees with companies who may be hiring, with multinationals in IDA Ireland’s client base and with indigenous companies through Enterprise Ireland. This work has already begun.

I have also scheduled a meeting with the global Becton Dickinson leadership in the US in a fortnight as part of a wider trade and investment mission to the east coast of the United States of America. I will be discussing further this decision as raised by the Deputies.

In parallel, IDA Ireland continues to engage with Becton Dickinson corporate, Becton Dickinson UK and Ireland, and Becton Dickinson Drogheda to assist the company. It has indicated that the company is committed to supporting affected employees. IDA Ireland will provide introductions to companies that are currently recruiting locally, and will provide support services for affected staff with Skillnet and Solas. IDA Ireland will also work with Becton Dickinson on marketing the site for potential new employers. This will involve IDA Ireland, Enterprise Ireland and the local enterprise offices working together to see how new employment can be secured for Drogheda and for the Becton Dickinson site in particular. The Government is on hand to support workers. Our agencies will work to support employees affected right across the period ahead.

Factors affecting the decision cited by the company include demand for the company's PosiFlush syringe line, competitiveness pressures, low-cost locations, the desire to right-size to match the company's supply chain, and the availability and capacity of Becton Dickinson locations including those in other locations than Ireland. Staff were notified by the company of its decision yesterday, 3 July, with a formal collective redundancy process to commence. This announcement follows an earlier 2023 decision to reduce the headcount by 60 due to the demand last year. This is very disappointing news for the Drogheda facility that has provided invaluable employment for almost 60 years. The company has indicated that it will continue to employ more than 900 workers in other sites in Enniscorthy, Dublin and Limerick.

Deputy O'Dowd has outlined his experience of working with the company. I assure Deputies that in our proposed meeting, we will do everything we can to work with the company to have them evaluate the decision in the days ahead. I do not want to raise any expectations in connection with that because it is a clear board decision that has been taken on sustainability grounds by the company. As Deputy O'Dowd alluded to, the 50,000 sq. m new advanced factory unit received planning permission on 26 June. The procurement process will now begin to deliver that site and we will ensure that IDA Ireland will aggressively market it. Notwithstanding the efforts that will be made, if this timeline does come to pass IDA Ireland now has a very significant unit, hopefully working with Becton Dickinson, if they depart. We will work in a very regulated industry, with a very valuable asset in the current life sciences chain, to ensure we get a client to fulfil it and improve the infrastructure and employment in Drogheda.

I thank the Minister, Deputy Burke, for being here to deal with this important matter.

I agree that it is a very important development. We have all been working for years to ensure that IDA Ireland develops the advanced units we need to bring employment to Drogheda. It is now incumbent on IDA Ireland to fast-track that process. Planning permission has been provided and we hope that will move forward very quickly. They confirmed to me yesterday that they are aggressively marketing that to potential international investors. There is an issue with the Donore Road site. If we concede that the company will not review its decision - there is an onus on the Minister to ask it to reassess its decision on behalf of the workers and the people of Drogheda - we must bear in mind that state aid grant decisions made by the Government in 2021 mean that we are very limited in how we can provide grant aid to any future development on the Donore Road site. This decision was initiated by the previous Government and signed off by this one. There was a review of that. I am interested to establish what the review found. Is it the case that the site can be properly resourced in the future? If a future investor is interested in investing on that site, can they receive employment grants, for example?

In conclusion, if the threshold of jobs lost is 200 as well as - possibly - supply chain jobs associated with the plant, there is the possibility of applying for funds through the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund to assist with upskilling and retraining. Is that an avenue the Minister would pursue in association with the trade unions?

It is a shocking blow to the town. I accept the Minister's bona fides in trying to address the issue at this late stage. The fact is that the Taoiseach has promised a task force for Drogheda, which is what I want. I have met with him and we have discussed it with his staff. It will be broader, but will include this as a key issue. Very shortly - around 16 July - I expect the Taoiseach to meet with people who are interested in this matter to discuss how we do that. The task force is very important.

This decision was made and the company was very clear on it. They talked about their Irish board, not their international board. Is there room for manoeuvre there? It is just an issue for me. If the Minister is going to the international headquarters, perhaps there is an opportunity to make a different play that might be listened to with different ears and with a different outcome. I also want to know if there is an issue around water and the cost of water. Is that one of the issues they notified to IDA Ireland? I understand the company has given IDA Ireland a critique of why they are moving out of Drogheda. We need to know that. I ask the Minister to place this on the record of the House or give it to us. We can address those issues if we know what they are.

At the end of the day we value the work force and we value the jobs, but we also value the company. I want to stress that. They have made a very significant contribution and I think they have huge potential as a leading advanced medical technology company. There is room for them in Drogheda and we will do whatever we can to help them.

I take on board both points made by Deputy Nash and both points made by Deputy O'Dowd in connection with this. I reiterate that the families of all those affected and those workers are to the forefront of our minds because it is a very significant employer that has had a generational impact within the town of Drogheda, and indeed beyond.

The national planning framework sets out a very significant designation for Drogheda to achieve capital investment into the future. We will be absolutely committing to working with the Taoiseach and others to ensure that happens. It is very important to the region. This has been demonstrated by the advanced factory unit getting planning permission on 26 June. There is work ahead to market it. We will work with Becton Dickinson into the future as well in its other locations. We will also try to see what we can do when we discuss it with management. I am happy to meet with SIPTU to see what can be achieved through the globalisation fund, but the bar is significantly high in connection with that.

On the state aid aspect, it is very clear in the European Union rules that funding a current industry or production line is quite different from when there is a new company moving in. IDA Ireland has a lot of tools in its armoury that it can release to try to get new clients in. We will support them to do just that.

In the wider context, the issue that was raised front and centre with me concerned the changes in the supply chain. From a sustainability perspective, quite a proportion of their market is US based and they are moving the plant on that basis. We have all seen the stress we are under with our competitiveness. This is why we have a capital infrastructure programme of €165 billion out to the next decade. Water needs to be improved upon right around the country. I note that the regulators came out saying they need a 70% increase in price. That is very significant. I have written to the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Hermitage in connection with that. We need to ensure we are remaining competitive. That is a big concern in the economy. We must keep improving our grid infrastructure, our water and our wastewater. There is a huge amount of work to be done in that regard. We will obviously do that and play our part as I have done in the 13 weeks I have been in this job.

I thank the Minister for taking this matter.

I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Kieran O'Donnell, for coming to the Chamber to respond to Deputies Chris Andrews and Seán Crowe, who wish to discuss the planned national children's science centre and the impact of the proposed development on the Iveagh Gardens.

I thank the Minister of State for coming in. The Iveagh Gardens is a unique part of our city. It is a hugely important asset to the local community, which has very little green space. It is a five-minute walk from here. It is tucked away at the back of the National Concert Hall. It is in an area with one of the lowest amounts of green space per capita of any European city. We must protect it. It would be devastating to allow this piece of heritage and this green area, which is a jewel in Dublin's crown, to disappear.

There are plans to develop an children's science museum at the National Concert Hall by Irish Children's Museum Limited, ICML, which is a charity.

That will damage the park and eat into it. We must protect these gardens. This entire project is being carried out in the dark. It has created so many questions and there are still so many questions around it. It was discussed in the Committee of Public Accounts last week. There are many questions that no one seems to want to or be able to answer.

According to the ICML, which is behind this project, work is due to begin next year. For me, this is astounding considering no business case or feasibility study has been done by the OPW or the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform, none at all. No Department has committed to meeting the annual cost of running this science museum. No one knows who will be responsible for the running of this science museum. Will the ICML run it and continue the fundraising required to sustain the exhibits or will it be handed back to the State to run? Again, we do not know.

The Minister has confirmed that the OPW is legally obliged to construct the national children's science centre. Can a summary of the detailed legal advice be provided to the Committee of Public Accounts, as it requested on 12 June 2024? In fact, at a meeting on 11 October 2018, Mr. Maurice Buckley is on record as saying: "I cannot imagine that people of that eminence who are good, solid citizens, would wish to pursue the project if it did not pass muster with the cost-benefit analysis and public spending code." Will this project be subject to a business case appraisal in accordance with the requirements of the public spending code? If not, why not?

There is no need for a new science centre as there is already one on 20 acres that was built in 2019. The Minister of State with responsibility for sport relaunched it just this year. It is in Sandyford, which is just 11 km away from this other proposed science museum. It does not make any sense whatsoever. Who will own this proposed new building if it is built? What will be the estimated costs to the Government to fit out, provide installation and operate this building? The Minister of State has confirmed that the OPW is legally obliged to construct this national children's science centre. Can a summary of the detailed advice be provided?

The cost of this project is now estimated to be €70 million. When this project started, 21 years ago, the cost was estimated to be €15 million. There are also various issues around this project. It is still hanging around and it seems that this board, the ICML, is going to try to push it on next year.

I might be a bit slow, but could the Deputy make it clear to us who is proposing to build this mysterious centre?

Well, it is the ICML, which is a charity.

What does it have to do with the National Concert Hall?

That is the site where the building will be constructed.

Who is giving the charity the site?

The OPW is going to build it and it was locked into an agreement several years ago.

Right. Can we hear the Minister of State anyway?

Yes. If I could just say, the cost of this project started at €15 million. It is now going to cost €70 million.

We could build two of them.

I thank the Deputies for raising this matter. The national children's science centre, NCSC, aims to provide an interactive science museum that will include over 200 scientific exhibits, interactive science spaces and demonstration areas, as well as a lecture and planetarium space. I understand that it is intended that these facilities will interact with science curriculum activity in schools, scientific organisations and related technological groups. This is consistent with the Government's policy on the promotion of science, technology, engineering and mathematics, STEM, as outlined in the Department of Education's policy statement 2017-2026.

The development of the national children’s science centre received a notification of a decision to grant planning permission from Dublin City Council on 23 November 2022. Following a third-party appeal from two parties, An Bord Pleanála issued a grant of planning permission in March 2024. The planning submission made by the OPW, along with the response to the third-party appeal issued to An Bord Pleanála, addressed all the issues raised regarding any possible impacts to the Iveagh Gardens. This is supported by An Bord Pleanála within the report of the inspectors. The concerns expressed in the petition from the Save the Iveagh Gardens group were addressed as part of the OPW planning application made in 2022. An Bord Pleanála accepted the OPW’s submission in its decision.

The national children’s science centre will re-establish some of the historic links that existed as part of the original Iveagh Garden 1865 design and which were broken due to the construction of the current wall in 1909. It is important to note that the original 1865 exhibition design incorporated the exhibition building and the Iveagh Gardens as one entity. With the establishment of the university at Earlsfort Terrace, the Iveagh Gardens location was separated by a wall. The new building will not encroach on the Iveagh Gardens. It will allow universal access to the gardens from Earlsfort Terrace which is currently not possible.

During 2021, arbitration proceedings were brought by ICML, as the Deputy referred to. The arbitrator found in favour of the ICML in June 2022. The arbitrator has yet to reconvene the parties to the case following the recent grant of planning permission in March 2024. The subject of this determination is likely to set out timelines for the procurement of the project by the OPW. Provision for the national children’s science centre is not included in the 2023 Estimates as the arbitration proceedings were ongoing. The Government has yet to decide which Department or Departments will be the funder of this building. The details of the conditions of the planning permission are currently being assessed and an update on the total project costs will be determined soon. Following the arbitration process, the OPW has a legal obligation to construct the national children's science centre.

This project has been foisted on the OPW and the National Concert Hall. The Iveagh Gardens are an extremely important part of our heritage. The location functions as a lung in the city of Dublin and it must be protected. This is the thin edge of the wedge. Three Departments have grant funded the project but they have left the National Concert Hall and the OPW holding the baby. The OPW will build the structure but it will not assess the viability of the project. It has stated this fact. We do not know if the viability has been assessed. Neither do we know who is going to assess the viability of this project.

This is a remarkable story, with absolutely zero transparency. Why do we need another science museum? We already have one just 10 km or 11 km from here. The ICML charity needs to answer these questions. It seems to be like a secret organisation, to be honest. It has an office in the National Concert Hall. Who gives it that office? Is it paying rent? What are the conditions in this regard?

This project would have a devastating impact on the Iveagh Gardens, which have been protected so far. We must be vigilant about it. There is no strong case for this science museum. If there is one, I would like to hear what it is. We must do everything we can to save the Iveagh Gardens because it is a beautiful space. More than 46,000 people signed a petition calling for the Iveagh Gardens to be protected and this project to be ended. I call on the Minister of State to get some answers for the people who are outraged by the damage that will be done to the Iveagh Gardens. People from right across the city use the space daily. It is also used for various events. It is something we need to protect.

I appreciate that the Minister of State has given a lot of clarity in his response, but I still do not know what the ICML entity is. This is the party that is applying for this project and that is going to build it. What is this group?

It is a private charity.

I have never heard of it.

Exactly.

Could the Minister of State tell us about it, please?

I have only held this portfolio for a short time, but my understanding is that the ICML brought forward a proposal to build a science centre. That centre has ended up being the subject of arbitration in 2013 and 2021, with a decision having been made in June 2022. That decision from the arbitrator was that the OPW had the legal obligation to build the national science centre. It went through planning and it was appealed to An Board Pleanála, with a final decision made by that agency in March 2024.

The arbitrator has to reconvene to bring back the parties to the case, which are the OPW and the Irish Children's Museum Company Limited, to determine what are the deadlines and the next steps forward. That arbitrator's decision was a legal decision, which stated that the OPW had a legal obligation to build a national science centre. The Government is yet to decide which Department will fund the building. In summary, based on the decision and ruling of the arbitrator in June 2022, the OPW has a legal obligation to construct the science centre. We are obviously working through the details of planning permission and an update of the total costs will then be determined. The OPW will continue to engage with other Departments regarding the execution of its obligations including the funding costs. The arbitrator has yet to convene a meeting between the parties, which are the Irish Children's Museum Company Limited and the OPW, to decide the next steps forward.

I think we are making a bit of history. What the Minister of State is effectively saying to us is that a registered charity has a deal to access a piece of public land.

No, it is being built by the OPW.

I did not get to that yet. It got the site from the National Concert Hall by whatever means. That has been arranged. It has gone to arbitration to get the OPW to build it. The OPW is the manager and curator of the State's facilities and properties. The arbitrator's decision is that the OPW must build it. That seems to imply the Government must also fund it. Would you not want to know before you start what you are going to be spending on it?

I will deal with the core point brought up by Deputy Andrews. My understanding is that it will not encroach on Iveagh Gardens.

Trees will have to be knocked. A partition wall is going to be knocked too.

It went through a legal process. The legal process has gone on for many years and dates back to 2003. There was a Government decision at the time. It was before my time and ultimately ended up in arbitration. The most recent arbitration was in 2021. The arbitrator made a decision in June 2022, which basically said the OPW is legally obliged to build it. The next steps were that the OPW had to apply for planning permission. It was appealed to An Bord Pleanála by the two parties. An Bord Pleanála made its final decision with a grant in March 2024. The next step is that the arbitrator reconvenes with the parties, which are the Irish Children's Museum Company Limited, which is the promoter, and the OPW, to decide the next steps. The Government has yet to decide which Department will fund this building. This building has just been granted final permission. That is the current state of play.

I suspect we will hear a great deal more about it. I thank the Minister of State for being here, and all the Members for raising the various matters.

We move to a very important report by the committee on agriculture and food.

I move:

That Dáil Éireann shall take note of the Report of the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine entitled "Environmental Impact of Local Industrial Emissions in Castlecomer, Co. Kilkenny", copies of which were laid before Dáil Éireann on 11th May, 2023.

As Chairman of the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine, I am glad to present this report to the Dáil for discussion this evening. I pass on apologies from Deputy McGuinness, who is unavoidably absent. I welcome, in the Visitors Gallery, the farmer in question, Dan Brennan, and his friends and neighbours. To show how serious this issue is being taken by the agricultural community, the president of the IFA, Francie Gorman, and the president of the ICMSA, Denis Drennan, are also in the Visitors Gallery to show solidarity with Dan Brennan.

We did this report at the back end of last year. The committee's view was that it would have liked to have done an independent investigation. The legal representatives of the House stated, however, that that was beyond the remit of the committee. I thank the Minister, Deputy McConalogue, for taking the time to be here to discuss this report. I earnestly request that an independent investigation be carried out into what happened on Dan Brennan's farm. I make the point that this was not on the current Minister's watch. It happened a number of years ago. We are talking about something that happened 20 years ago on Dan Brennan's farm in Castlecomer, County Kilkenny. However, there are a lot of unanswered questions. One thing is certain, which is that Dan Brennan has suffered huge mental anguish and financial hardship from what happened on his farm. I will raise a number of issues that I think will prove conclusively that an independent investigation needs to happen into the incidents on Dan Brennan's farm. I have three letters from vets who worked in the Department.

The first is dated 15 October 2004 and is from Mr. Dolan, who had spent two years on Dan Brennan's farm. He wrote that it had been confirmed that there was a severe problem of illthrift and stunting on this farm. No infectious cause of the problem had been identified to that date. The second is from Pat Kelleher, the head of the Department laboratory in Kilkenny, dated 26 October 2004. He wrote that Mr. Brennan's farm is close to an Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, licensed facility, and the circumstances in which he finds himself are outside his control and could not have been foreseen.

The third letter, dated 24 May 2005, is from John Moriarty. He said the farm was now the subject of an interagency investigation consisting of the Department, the EPA, Teagasc, the health board and county council, in accordance with specific guidelines and protocols of investigation approaches to serious animal and human health problems. The activation by the State of this protocol is only made in exceptional cases. He wrote that they had carried out extensive testing, analysis and feed trials, but had not yet identified the cause of, or a possible solution to, the problem. He continued that the circumstances in which Mr. Brennan found himself were outside his control and could not have been foreseen. He had implemented all recommendations given to him by the laboratory and Teagasc. Mr. Brennan had been extremely co-operative throughout the investigation and invested huge time and financial resources in assisting with the investigation. However, the problem continued.

I have the full copies of those letters if the Minister wants them, but they were three Department vets who stated clearly that an issue they could not comprehend was happening on Dan Brennan's farm. Why did the Department allow the laboratory to publish a report saying that Dan Brennan's disease management was the problem on his farm? Michael Sheridan, the deputy chief veterinary inspector, was one of 15 people present at a meeting in the Newpark Hotel in June 2006. Also present were representatives of Teagasc, Kilkenny regional veterinary laboratory, UCD's veterinary college, the EPA, Kilkenny County Council, Dan Brennan's vets, Limerick university and a scientist from North Carolina. The UCD veterinary college had done an epidemiology report on the farm and told the lab in Kilkenny and Michael Sheridan that it was not disease.

The veterinary college proved this later when it took over the farm. A blood test was taken every two weeks for a period of two years and no disease was found. This point is important. The veterinary college conducted extensive blood testing on the animals on Mr. Brennan's farm and no disease was found.

Why did the Department ignore Mr. Tom Slevin when he told them the cattle had bones growing in their soft tissues and their vertebrae could be cut with a knife? He had never seen this before in his 45 years as a vet. Eleven of the 40 cattle died during the investigation and underwent post mortems. A number of important points need to be made about those port mortems. To say that bones growing in soft tissues was unusual would very much be an understatement. It was agreed that a pathologist from the UK would come - I believe two names were provided to the Department - to conduct independent post mortems, but that never came about. It is extraordinary that animals would have bones growing out of their kidneys, so there had to be an extraordinary reason for that to happen. The question of why independent post mortems were not conducted merits an investigation on its own. The results of the post mortems have never explained how animals could experience such internal issues.

In January 2003, Teagasc in Kilkenny wrote to the EPA to say there was something seriously wrong on Mr. Brennan's farm. The EPA stated that the management of the farm was not the problem and that it was down to something it had never seen before. Professor Jack Gardiner, then a dean at UCD, was commissioned to do a study. He concluded that 45 acres of the farm's trees, ditches and so on had been affected by pollution. In his view, it had been caused by fluoride. This is a serious point.

The case was taken to Brussels. I have watched videos of the hearings there. The video from 2012 shows Commissioner Mairead McGuinness, who was an MEP at the time, saying the joint research committee would examine the matter. Department of agriculture and the EPA officials were in attendance. Mr. Brennan got a phone call in July of that year from a person on the committee stating that there was political interference in his case and it would not progress any further. That was the end of the process in Brussels.

I wish to refer to a letter that was sent to the Minister. I received a copy of it. It came from a retired Circuit Court judge. According to the retired judge, an area of concern is that the issues in question were before a committee of the European Parliament from 2010 to 2012 and that, on the last occasion, the recording confirmed that the matter was adjourned for further investigation and was due to be revisited upon the completion of that investigation. In the judge's opinion, what followed was something that ought to cause a great deal of concern to those, particularly parliamentarians, who uphold proper standards and procedures in our democratic institutions. The case never came back before the committee and the investigation in question appears to have never taken place. Instead, the file was sent to Ireland, apparently for consideration by a parliamentary committee in this jurisdiction. However, there was not so much as a covering note in that regard. Even more troubling in the retired judge's opinion is that this decision was not made by the European committee sitting in either open or closed session. Rather, it appeared to have been decided upon by the committee secretariat. The strong suspicion of political interference is inescapable. The retired judge felt it was worth noting that the effect of this transfer was the investigation by the State, inter alia , of two organs of the State, those being the Minister's Department and the EPA. Thereafter, it took a full decade before the matter came to be considered at municipal level, and then only after extremely dogged persistence on the part of Mr. Brennan and his advisers, without which it would undoubtedly have never seen the light of day.

Of even greater concern to the retired judge is that Mr. Brennan has been denied access to this file for all the years it has been in the country. The retired judge asks on what basis such a refusal can be justified. If there ever was such a basis, it had never been communicated to Mr. Brennan or his advisers or supporters. The retired judge wrote it would be interesting to hear how this could be justified when we next spoke on this matter in the Dáil. I know the Minister has the full letter. How a case can go to Brussels and not have its hearing concluded is difficult to explain.

In September 2004, Teagasc in Moorepark told the Department that cadmium poisoning was affecting the cattle on Mr. Brennan's farm and that it had even been found in the cattle sheds' chutes. The Department did not get the veterinary college to test for cadmium when the latter took over the investigation for the former. Mr. Jim Crilly, the vet for Teagasc at Moorepark, rang the college to tell it to test for cadmium. It was only then that it showed up in the blood of Mr. Brennan's cattle. In December 2008, the college told Mr. Brennan, Mr. Slevin and Mr. Michael Lambe that the cattle had 95% of the symptoms associated with cadmium poisoning. The college told us that the report would be out in 2009. It told Mr. Brennan and his vets that it would be ten to 12 years before any major improvement would be noticed. It told him not to get out of the cow business, as his cattle had built up a level of tolerance to the pollution.

It would be remiss of me not to recall Mr. Pádraig Walshe, a former president of the IFA who put a great deal of work into pressing Mr. Brennan's case.

When the college found high levels of cadmium in the cattle's blood, it wrote to the EPA to find out how much cadmium per hour was coming out of the factory. The EPA told the college it was 1 g per hour, but the reading was actually 1,000 times higher at 1 kg. Why did no alarm bells go off in the EPA when the test from 2004 showed that Ormonde Brick was emanating 88 times the amount of cadmium set out in the German guidelines? Why are there no records of any more cadmium testing being done at this point, especially after Teagasc at Moorepark told the Department that the cattle had cadmium poisoning? Teagasc found that, despite the fact that the cattle were eating 12.5% more than normal, they were losing weight. Sick or diseased cattle do not eat. Extensive trials were done on the farm. Cattle and fodder from a neighbouring farm were brought in and cattle from Mr. Brennan's farm were taken to another farm to be fed. All these trials showed that, once animals were on Mr. Brennan's farm, they did not thrive and suffered serious ill health.

Why did the Department ignore Mr. Lambe - Mr. Brennan's vet - when he told it that there was a toxic agent at work? He had ruled out all other causes on the farm in 2002. Why did the Department ignore the veterinary college in April 2004 when the college told the Department that the farm needed to be looked at from a helicopter view and that something in the area was affecting it? This issue is cutting very close to the bone for many people in the Castlecomer area. In 2007, the parish priest said in public at a funeral that the deceased was the eighth worker from Ormonde Brick he had buried in the previous 12 years and that there were others buried in other parishes whose funeral mass he had not celebrated. From the altar at that funeral mass, the priest asked whether someone would please do something about this situation.

The Department rang Mr. Brennan in October 2009 and told him there had been a little glitch and that the cadmium found in samples taken over a six-month period had accidentally been put into those samples in the lab and had not come out of the factory. How could this have happened in an EPA-accredited lab?

Samples were taken from Dan Brennan's farm but it looks like they did not want to test them. They waited until the results would not be accurate. There is a strong correlation between increasing cadmium levels in the body of animals and weight loss in the animals. Furthermore, osteopenia occurred at levels of 11.5%. The scientific data confirming these links prove exposure of Dan's animals to toxic levels of cadmium.

I have raised a large number of questions. There are other points I can also raise. I am asking most earnestly, as Cathaoirleach of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine, that the Minister hold an independent investigation into what happened. Let us get answers to the questions. I have another nine or ten questions on the list in front of me. These are questions that need to be asked on behalf of Dan Brennan and answers need to be given to him. I have met Dan Brennan on many occasions in recent years. I find him a most genuine man. All he wants is answers to the questions he is asking and justification that the losses incurred on his farm and what was happening to his cattle were outside of his control and had nothing to do with his and his family's farming practices.

I thank Deputy Cahill and the committee for their work on this and for commissioning the report on the environmental impact of local industrial emissions in Castlecomer, County Kilkenny, which was completed last year. I acknowledge the presence of Dan Brennan and his colleagues, farm representatives Francie Gorman and Denis Drennan, who are the presidents of the IFA and ICMSA, and other representatives and supporters.

The report deals with the issues Mr. Brennan and his advisers have raised with regard to the environmental impact allegedly caused by industrial emissions from a brick factory. The committee has put significant time and work into this and held a number of meetings to assess it. The clear ask from everyone collectively is for a further review and assessment of what happened. When we discussed this most recently in a Topical Issue Debate, I undertook to assess the matter further. I also requested to be informed of any additional further information. With the passage of time, there is no new information but significant assessments were done previously.

While I do not see any basis, as such, from my assessment of the matter, in acknowledgement of the work the committee has done and the questions it is raising it is appropriate that I have a separate independent review of the Department's investigation and any information that fed into it, to examine this further, provide feedback and look at what has been done. Twenty years is a long time and there is a lot of water under the bridge. I respect the work of the committee, the priority and time it has collectively given to this issue and the assessment it has made. In recognition of this, it is fair that I ask an independent person to review the Department's work and investigation into this matter and any other information.

It is important to recount the work carried out by a number of State agencies since these events occurred 20 years ago or more. In 2003, the problems reported in Mr. Brennan's herd were initially investigated by the regional veterinary laboratory in Kilkenny. Because of the severity and intractable nature of the problem experienced on the farm, a legitimate question was raised about the possibility of environmental pollution playing a role in Mr. Brennan's farming difficulties. Having looked at all of the options and given the gravity of the situation, an interagency group was convened in line with the protocol for the investigative approach to serious animal and human health issues.

The substantial resources required to convene an interagency group meant this decision was not taken lightly. The decision to do so reflected the serious consideration given to Mr. Brennan's farm, the possible risks to the environment and the potential human health concerns also raised at the time. The interagency group comprised relevant and expert bodies of the State with competence to assess, on a scientific and objective basis, whether environmental pollution could have a role to play in the farm's difficulties.

The group was not in any way dismissive of the possibility that environmental pollution was a factor in the issues on the farm. Indeed, the opposite was the case because the group was expressly established to explore this possibility. The group comprised experts from the Department's veterinary laboratories, Teagasc, the South Eastern Health Board, as it then was, and Kilkenny County Council. The Environmental Protection Agency, as the body with specific expertise and responsibility for monitoring the control of environmental pollution, was also a member of the group. This joint and combined scientific investigation into Mr. Brennan's difficulties and the wider environment was impartial, detailed and substantial.

The veterinary laboratory's report of June 2006 details the comprehensive field and laboratory investigations undertaken on the farm. In tandem with the investigation, during the latter part of 2005 the Department funded a comprehensive animal health programme on the farm. On foot of this, we understand that animal health and production on the farm had shown a definite improvement from the first five months of 2006. Subsequently, and on foot of a request by Mr. Brennan and his advisers, University College Dublin's centre of veterinary epidemiology and risk analysis, CVERA, was commissioned to conduct further epidemiological studies on the farm. The CVERA report was completed in August 2009. Teagasc carried out animal production investigations, which included animal feeding and nutrition trials between 2003 and 2005, trace element analysis in 2004 and soil and herbage investigations in 2007, in support of the additional investigation of CVERA and the EPA.

Substantial and in-depth investigations were conducted by the EPA into fluoride emissions analysed by University College Cork, a tree survey conducted by UCD school of agriculture, an EPA report on licence parameters and compliance monitoring, continuous emissions monitoring system outputs, dispersion modelling of cadmium emissions, production records regarding material safety data sheets, grass and soil analysis and an independent peer review of the work of the operations of the brick factory by US and UK environmental experts. The HSE reviewed human health parameters as part of the interagency group investigations. This involved an examination of any unusual patterns of human illness in the area. Kilkenny County Council carried out assessments of the water on the farm.

The interagency report of 2010 had regard to all of the reports by the various agencies involved. On the basis of scientific evaluation of these investigations, the interagency group issued its conclusions in its final report of August 2010. I understand that at all stages Mr. Brennan was kept apprised of ongoing studies and receive the reports as they were completed. Mr. Brennan and his advisers were also provided with opportunities to raise any concerns they may have had about the ongoing investigations. I am advised that Mr. Brennan sought a meeting with the authors of the 2009 CVERA report before the final draft was completed. On both occasions Mr. Brennan was given the opportunity to correct any factual errors in or omissions from the reports.

The final interagency report in 2010 specifically concluded there was no evidence of environmental pollution, cadmium or fluoride impact on the health of animals on Mr. Brennan's farm. These conclusions were based on wide-ranging clinical and pathological analysis of blood and tissues of animals on the farm and on extensive environmental analysis.

I acknowledge the report of the joint committee and I specifically note that the committee disagrees with some of the conclusions of the interagency report. However, it is evident that at the time the effort by the State to get to the bottom of the matter was significant. The agencies involved were there to serve the public interest. I do not have any reason to believe their efforts were intended to do anything other than establish the facts on this matter.

Notwithstanding the significant scientific work carried out by the five agencies as part of the interagency group, which concluded with the findings of the interagency report of 2010, I appreciate very much the human element of this.

I acknowledge the stress experienced by Mr. Brennan and his family due to the health issues in his herd, which undoubtedly have been very difficult. In recognition of that and of the work and request of the committee, I will now move to seek an independent review of the Department's investigation into this and of the reports that fed into it, to report back to me.

Again, I thank the committee for its work in giving time and attention to this, looking into it and bringing its final report before the Dáil. I acknowledge the presence of Dan Brennan with many of his supporters and colleagues, including the Minister of State, Deputy Noonan.

I thank the Minister for being here and warmly welcome Dan Brennan, his family and friends and representatives of the farm organisations.

Some facts are in dispute but this is what we know. The Brennan family ran a successful farm that was considered to be top-notch by anyone who ever saw it. Then problems began to emerge at the same time as activities taking place in a nearby factory. Animals got sick. Milk yield dramatically reduced. Biodiversity was destroyed. Plant life was wiped out. As the output of the adjoining factory intensified, the problems got worse and more intense. When the Brennan family complained and raised issues and concerns, they were told to varying degrees that either it was their fault, in once instance, or that the problems pertained to disease and not pollution. However, when animals that were severely underweight and severely under-yielding were taken from Dan Brennan's farm to a separate setting, their health improved dramatically. Throughout this time when all these issues were prevailing, Dan Brennan and his family were striving for answers. That is not the action of a deficient farmer. That is not the action of someone who is irresponsible. It is the action of someone who is desperately trying to find answers to what is happening on his farm.

Throughout that time, farm organisations, independent experts, academics, farm advisers and, from my reading, every objective person who analysed this found Dan Brennan was an excellent farmer. Indeed, farm leaders, as Deputy Cahill mentioned, and farming journalists staked their credibility on defending Dan Brennan as a farmer and arguing for answers. However, for some reason, the Department refused to accept all those facts. All those reports and work by various agencies as described by the Minister have been considered deficient. These are people who the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine considers to be experts when evidence is being sought. Then in December 2008, the brick factory closed and, literally overnight, farm conditions immediately began to improve to such a point that within a relatively short time, the farm again became a model of best practice.

Throughout the time since, Dan Brennan has fought like hell for the truth. I was not aware for much of that time of the efforts that he and others who were advocating for him had gone to. The first time I became aware of the case was in November 2022 when Dan Brennan and others associated with the case came before the joint committee. I have never been as struck by evidence that was put before the committee and I was pleased that the committee decided to bring forward this report. Since we brought forward the report, the initial response of the Department was to dismiss it entirely. In December, the month after the report was commissioned, then Deputy Kathleen Funchion, who is now a Member of the European Parliament, asked by way of oral question that these issues be independently investigated. The Minister refused. In November 2023, Deputies Cahill, Fitzmaurice, McGuinness and I raised a Topical Issue matter to ask questions and call for an independent examination. That request was refused as it has been in subsequent Topical Issue Matters since.

Today the Minister has committed to ensuring there is an independent review of all these circumstances and I absolutely welcome that. I appeal to him not to take the goodness out of it. He has taken an important step forward today. I ask him to sit down with Dan Brennan and the leaders of the IFA and the ICMSA to agree how that independent review will take place, how it will operate and function. With no disrespect to any of the Department officials, it is clear from the evidence we heard that the Department has not been up to the standard we expect in getting answers. I therefore appeal to the Minister to sit around a table with those people to agree terms of reference for this and allow us to get to the truth.

I was struck when I was talking to a young person in my office, trying to explain the complexity of these issues in a short time, whose retort was to ask me to imagine a situation where a farmer was accused of causing widespread destruction to wildlife and plant life for many years, and any time an examination was done, it was said that it was not the farmer's fault at all. Then all of a sudden the farm stopped operating and the problems solved themselves immediately. We would not all be allowed to pretend it never happened. This House would be in uproar trying to get answers. It should be the same in this case, despite the fact that the factory closed in 2008 and whatever has happened. Anyone who has spent more than 30 seconds with Dan Brennan knows the pain, hurt and anger that any farmer would feel if accused of being a bad farmer or of being somehow responsible for what happened on this farm. We should be equally adamant that the truth must come out in this case.

I welcome the Minister's statement, especially, according to the language he used, that he will seek an independent review, ensure it is a truly independent review and that the terms and operation of that review are agreed beforehand so that we can all have confidence that at the end of the day, we might finally get a step closer to the truth.

I may not use all of the eight minutes. I am here because I have known Dan Brennan for a long time. I am not a member of the agriculture committee. I congratulate its Chair and the various members of the committee for their tireless and unceasing work on this. It gives me great faith in the committee and in the workings of this House that we can get to this point. I will come back to the Minister's response in a moment.

I got to know Dan Brennan when I was a Member of the European Parliament. He does not live in the constituency I represented, but when he came to see me and laid out his case, like all members of the committee, I was immediately struck by the fact that this case had to be heard. The evidence I could see and the reports and so on that were placed in front of me were such that it would have been egregious not to have his case heard and for him and his family not to find some kind of justice. I will also mention the farming organisations and welcome Francie Gorman and Denis Drennan here today because they have stood shoulder to shoulder with Dan Brennan. When we see TDs from all sides of the House and leaders of farm organisations down through the years stand with Dan Brennan, it is clear that this is a substantial case.

This is not an issue that can be just brushed under the carpet.

To return to what happened at European level, I was a member of the petitions committee and I met Dan Brennan on a number of occasions when he came before it. I have no memory of any public discussion on his file being sent back to Dublin. There was certainly no agreement about that. It is crazy that, as a former member of that committee, I am asking in this House what happened to his file. Where did it go? Where was it sent? Who sent it and to whom was it sent? Is it still there? Somebody needs to answer those questions. The answer may be "I do not know", but at the very least we need to get an answer. In order to get an answer, somebody needs to see what happened. The relevance of that I just cannot say because I do not know what is in the file. However, the relevance of all of the detail that Deputy Cahill went through here is unquestioned. There are all of the different letters from three vets and the veterinary college saying that there were no diseases involved, yet a report from the Department states that it was probably down to some kind of infectious disease. I wonder was that infectious disease ever identified. Did those responsible ever state which disease it was or did they just say that it probably was some kind of disease because they did not know what it was? An independent pathologist was not brought in to carry out the post mortems. Why was that the case? The letters, etc., from the vets and the veterinary college were just ignored.

Deputy Cahill referred to the EPA lab and the glitch, whatever that was, that happened there in respect of the sample. How did that glitch happen? Why did it happen? All the evidence - I have believed this from the very first time I met Dan Brennan, but my belief has got stronger over the years - indicates that there is something really wrong here. I have never stood up in this House and said that about any other matter. As I said, Mr. Brennan lives on the other side of the country from me, but there is something really wrong here.

During the previous debate in November, the Minister stated that he had read all of the reports and that he was satisfied that there were no unanswered questions. I wonder if that is still the case. The Minister stated that there was no new information as such, but that we all have to agree that there are significant disputes about and discrepancies between what the Department says and what other experts say. There may be nothing new because, in a way, how would we expect there to be anything new so many years after the event or events occurred?

We need to look at the differences and discrepancies in the context of what happened and what the Department says and what other experts say. As Deputy Carthy said, one thing we, his family and all those in the farming organisations who know Dan Brennan know for sure is that he was a model farmer. Certainly, the timing of what happened cannot be disputed. I am not stating that one definitely existed, but there is very strong evidence to investigate the relationship between the opening and closing of the factory and the ill health suffered by the animals in Dan Brennan's herd.

The Minister indicated that there will be a review. I wrote down what he said to the effect that he will review the Department's work in relation to this matter alongside any information fed into it. I think I recorded that accurately. I welcome that, but it is absolutely crucial that the terms of review or investigation are extensive enough to take all available evidence into consideration and not just the work of the Department. It must include all of the letters, reports and information from vets, the veterinary college, Teagasc, the EPA and all of those involved with this case. As I said, and if relevant, the infamous file which somehow seemed to have made its way from Brussels to Dublin and then disappeared must also be reviewed.

The Minister has taken the first step. I thank him for that. I am glad to see it happen. It is late, but he is the Minister now and he is doing the right thing. He can rest assured of that. The terms of reference of the review must be extensive enough. The person who heads up the investigation needs to be independent and be seen to be independent. That is easy for the Minister to do, whether it is a retired judge or somebody else. The person must, as I said, be seen to be independent because this matter has dragged on for too long. It needs to be dealt with.

I thank the Minister for what he said. We look forward to hearing how this will progress. I again thank the agriculture committee. This is their work, and I hope it ends well. Dan Brennan's tenacity and courage is just incredible. This is his life, his life's work and his family farm. He wants to see that justice is done, that every piece of information is taken into consideration and that we get an independent review. We all look forward to that.

I call Deputy Fitzmaurice. The Deputy has four minutes.

Excuse me, but I believe I have eight minutes.

I commend Deputy Cahill, the Chair of our committee. He has sunk his teeth into this. As Deputy Harkin said, Deputy Carthy is from Monaghan. I am from Roscommon-Galway. Dan Brennan does not live in our area. Deputy Cahill is from Tipperary. When Dan Brennan appeared before our committee, we knew that somebody does not keep something going for 20 years. This matters dates back to 2004. A person does not keep something going unless they feel there is a woeful injustice being done to them.

I commend the farming organisations. I welcome Dennis Drennan and Francie Gorman to the Gallery. I also want to remember Padraig Walshe, who, God rest him, was with Dan Brennan the day he appeared before the committee. I think of Mr. Walshe.

This is not just about Dan Brennan. This could be a farmer in Donegal, Kerry, Sligo, Tipperary or somewhere else. I do not care what Department said what down through the years. What happened in this case stinks to the high heavens, to be quite frank. I am no private investigator or scientist, but when one checks fodder and water and when one says to a farmer - and it is insulting to a farmer to be told this - that they are not looking after their cattle properly when they are doing so, that is not good. When all of these things are checked, and the farmer is not at fault, then, as Deputy Harkin has said, you have to take a helicopter view and look outside to see what is wrong.

There was a guy who appeared before our committee - I believe it was a Mr. Crilly - who spoke about samples that were taken from eave gutters. That guy talked from the heart.

A huge amount of research was done but it was not listened to. Something stinks when something goes over to Brussels but comes back without a person on the committee knowing about it, without it being discussed, without anyone asking what we are going to do with it and whether we are going to have a report on it, and how it came back. Something is wrong when people are talking about one gram versus one kilogram of cadmium. There is something amiss and something awfully wrong and suspicious when samples go to a place but they do not appear or they get lost. God, it is very convenient. That should not happen. There is something very wrong if a vet who had an opinion is moved.

In fairness, this was not in the Minister's time. No one is saying one thing about the current Minister because he was not the Minister at that time. As politicians, no more than with regard to other inquiries that have been brought up in the Dáil, we have a responsibility to try to undo a wrong that has been done. We have a responsibility to this wronged person, a farmer and family man. We could see it etched in Dan Brennan's face at our committee meeting. I did not know the man from Adam and nor did Deputy Carthy. Deputy Cahill might have known him but we did not know him from Adam and we could see etched in his face the years of torture that he and his family had gone through in trying to get justice.

I welcome the Minister's indication that there will be an inquiry. I listened to him use words like "inquiry" and that there would be a "review" of what the Department had done and I heard him say there was no new information. We need an independent person, not one nominated by the Department, to conduct this inquiry. The Minister should find an independent person or ask Deputy Cahill to do so and put whatever expertise is required at that person's disposal. I would like to see someone like a retired High Court judge being appointed. He or she might not know a lot about farming but the Minister can provide the wherewithal to get the expertise from outside the country. The biggest problem, if we are investigating ourselves, is that we are not too fond of hanging ourselves.

The EPA has a lot to answer for here. There are certain State or semi-State bodies that have a fair bit to answer for because one farm was sacrificed for the bigger picture. I ask the Minister to make sure we get closure on this. We are not here on a Thursday afternoon for the craic. We are here to try to make sure that Dan Brennan gets justice. I welcome the fact that the Minister has made this effort but I urge him to provide the necessary expertise, whether that needs to come from Germany, the UK or elsewhere. No more than a lot of things in this country, it is a small circle. Not alone do we need a review of the Department, we also need a review of every person who gave evidence, as well as any other evidence that can be brought forward. We need to hear from the likes of Jim Crilly and we need to go to UCD and all other relevant places and look for the answers. We also need to go to Brussels to find out what went on behind the scenes whereby a report was posted back but nobody knows who did it. There is something very fishy about that.

I can go through all of the different parts of this but in fairness to Deputy Cahill, he has outlined the case well. We have heard it. Basically, bones started growing on kidneys. There is something wrong because that does not happen. How many farmers around the country today have had that happen to their herd? Zero. There was something wrong that caused that and it was not the fault of that man up in the Public Gallery, Dan Brennan. There is no point in my going through all the tittle-tattle about what went on. That is what the person who is going to head up this inquiry needs to do. He or she needs to meticulously go through this with an open mind, get the expertise that is needed and listen to all of the players in this, including the ordinary people.

I welcome what the Minister has done and thank him for it. He must make sure that this does not drag on for a year, leaving us scratching our heads again. This needs to be done as soon as possible. We need to provide whatever time is required to do it meticulously but we must not kick the ball so far down the road that we are waiting and waiting again.

I welcome Dan Brennan, Francie Gorman, Denis Drennan and representatives of the farm organisations to the House. I am sure Dan's family are watching at home as well. This is an important day for Dan and his family. I know Dan. He is a responsible and good farmer. I visited his farm with former Deputies Mary White and John Gormley during the depths of that crisis and saw at first hand what was going on. It was seriously untoward and wrong. I know Dan to be a good farmer and I know this is as much about pride and vindication of his practices as a farmer.

I welcome the work done by Deputy Cahill and the agriculture committee. I sat in on and watched that session and listened again to harrowing evidence from Dan. To have to relive that must have been very difficult for him and his family but the committee did a good job in taking on board that evidence. The commitment that my ministerial colleague, Deputy McConalogue, has given today is an important one and I really welcome it. I welcome the fact that he has committed to an independent review of this awful case. As other Deputies have said, it needs to be an expansive review that looks at all of the scientific evidence and takes everything into account. The terms of reference for the review are going to be very important. Today is an important day and a good day for Dan after what has been a very long and arduous journey for him and his family to clear their name and vindicate what they had known all along, which was that there was something very amiss that was not of their making.

I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Noonan, the committee Chairman, Deputy Cahill, and all of the members of the committee for their report and the work they did on this. I acknowledge again the presence of Dan Brennan and his family members, as well as farm organisation representatives and supporters in the House today.

As I said in my earlier contribution, there has been significant investigation and assessment of this case over the years by many State agencies. I referenced the interagency group which was set up and included the Department's veterinary laboratories, Teagasc, the then South Eastern Health Board, Kilkenny County Council and the EPA, as well as UCD's centre for veterinary epidemiology and risk analysis, CVERA. There is long record here of assessments that have been done in the context of determining what happened. I acknowledge the work the Oireachtas committee has done. While my Department is clear that processes were followed and assessments were taken and looked into with all due regard, I accept the request for an independent review and assessment and will now carefully consider the next steps.

Again, I thank the parliamentary committee for its work. It invested significant Oireachtas time, on a cross-party basis, in assessing this issue, which I respect and which I will assess further in terms of the steps I am taking.

I sincerely thank the Minister for taking on board the request from the Oireachtas joint committee, which I am privileged to chair. I really appreciate him doing so. Our report is entitled Environmental Impact of Local Industrial Emissions in Castlecomer, Co. Kilkenny, and I welcome the fact that we will have a review of what happened there. I will not go back over what I said earlier in the debate but I very much welcome the Minister's decision. I hope we can bring this to a conclusion, as Deputy Fitzmaurice said, sooner rather than later, but as long as we do it comprehensively and in an efficient manner, that is what I and everyone else who is involved in this wants. I sincerely thank the Minister for his presence this evening and for listening to the committee and its concerns. We just want to get to the truth of the matter and bring it, as I said, to a conclusion with an impending investigation as speedily and efficiently as possible.